CA Exam Admit Card FAQs Nov 2020

CA Exam Admit Card FAQs Nov 2020

1. How do I get my admit card?

Admit cards in respect of all eligible candidates admitted to the Foundation, Intermediate (IPC), Intermediate, Final and Final-New examination, with their photographs and signatures on them, will be hosted on https://icaiexam.icai.org/

No physical admit cards will be sent to any candidate. Candidates are required to download and print their admit cards from the website.

Admit card printed from the website contains your photograph and specimen signature, besides other necessary details and is a valid admit card for gaining admission to the examination. However, should there be still any query, feel free to contact the Helpline numbers of the Exam dept. as given in answer to Question No.10.

2. How do I print my admit card from the website?

1. Visit the site https://www.icaiexam.icai.org

2. Log in using your login ID(Registration Number) and password.

CA Exam Admit Card FAQs Nov 2020

3. Click on link in front of Admit Card

Your admit card and the “Instructions to Examinees” will appear on the screen. You can then print the same in A 4 size paper.

3. Will the admit cards contain my photograph and signature?

Yes, if the application you have submitted contains them.

4. My photograph and/or signature are not there in the admit card. Is it valid?

Yes. It is valid. In case the admit card does not bear the photograph and signature of the candidate, he/she is advised to paste the photograph and affix signatures in the area marked on the printout of the admit card and get this page attested by a member of the Institute (member may indicate his/her Name, membership number, and office stamp while signing/attesting at the bottom of that page) and carry the same to the examination centre, in duplicate, as proof of his/her identity. He/she will be required to hand over the original attested admit card to the examination centre, while retaining one copy of the same, for his/her own record. He/She is also advised to carry one* stamp size photograph (matching with the photograph affixed on the attested letter referred above) to the exam centre for affixing the same at the appropriate place in the attendance register.

Photograph and signature received through the above process will be used at the time of preparation of pass certificates / Mark Sheets.

(*NOTE : Please carry two stamp size photograph if you are a unit/both groups candidate.)

5. I have downloaded my admit card from the website. However, details therein do not relate to me. What should I do?

Contact the Helpline numbers ( mentioned below) immediately, quoting your registration number, bar code number of your examination form and receipt number issued by the regional office(s), if any, centre opted (with zone, if applicable), telephone number, fax number etc.

6. I have downloaded my admit card from the website. However, details therein are different from what I had filled in my exam application form. What should I do now?

Send an email or contact the Helpline numbers ( mentioned below) immediately, quoting your registration number, bar code number of your examination form and receipt number issued by the regional office(s), centre opted (with zone, if applicable), telephone number, fax number etc.

7. I have not yet received the physical admit card sent by post by ICAI. What should I do?

The practice of sending physical admit cards by post is discontinued with effect from May 2017 examination onwards.

You are required to print your admit card from the website https://ift.tt/2LuoOOy and carry the same to the examination hall.

8. I am not able to print my admit card from the site. What should I do?

Contact the Helpline numbers (mentioned below) immediately, quoting your registration number, bar code number of your examination form and receipt number issued by the regional office(s), centre opted (with zone, if applicable), telephone number, fax number etc.

9. I have a valid exemption in a paper. However, the admit card does not show that exemption. Will I get the exemption?

Exemptions granted to you are not shown on the admit card. Please go through the relevant statement of marks of the exam, where in your opinion, you were granted an exemption in a paper(s).

Alphabet “E” printed against the marks of a paper denotes that marks of that paper have been brought forward from an exemption granted in that paper in an earlier attempt.
So also, “#” symbol printed against the marks of a paper denotes that you have been granted an exemption in that paper, which will be valid for the next three following exams. Also the result below that Group shows “F-EX”

If no such symbol or alphabet is printed against the marks of any paper, even though the marks obtained in that paper may be more than 60, then that indicates that no exemption has been granted in that paper.

You can log in with your single sign on credentials at https://ift.tt/2LuoOOy after 15th April for May cycle exams & 15th October for November Cycle exams to check your exemptions.

Candidates are advised to go through the rules relating to “Exemption in a paper(s)” contained in the Guidance Notes hosted along with the Examination form, CA Regulations 1988 and the announcement dated 09-01-2018 hosted on the institute’s website www.icai.org and be clear about their exemption entitlements and not miss out on appearing in those paper/s where they are not eligible for exemption. Candidates can also check the status of the paper(s) in

which they are eligible for exemption in the forthcoming examination, at https://ift.tt/NsQz9b.

Also kindly refer to the FAQs on exemptions hosted on the website for more details.

10. What are the contact details? 

The post CA Exam Admit Card FAQs Nov 2020 appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/385RqL0

SEBI (Mutual Funds) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2020

SEBI (Mutual Funds) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2020

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

NOTIFICATION

Mumbai, the 29th October, 2020

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (MUTUAL FUNDS)

(SECOND AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS, 2020

No. SEBI/LAD-NRO/GN/2020/39.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 30 read with clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), the Board hereby makes the following regulations to further amend the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996, namely–

1. These Regulations may be called the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2020.

2. They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

3. In the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996,–

I. In sub-regulation (22) of Regulation 18, after the words “specified in” and before the words “the Fifth Schedule”, the words and symbol “PART-A of” shall be inserted.

II. Third Proviso to clause (b) of regulation 24 shall be substituted with the following, namely–

“Provided further that an asset management company may become a proprietary trading member for carrying out trades in the debt segment of the recognised stock exchanges, on behalf of its mutual fund schemes and may also become a self-clearing member of the recognised clearing corporations to clear and settle trades in the debt segment on behalf of its mutual fund schemes.”

III. In Regulation 25,

i. In sub-regulation (6A), the words “whatever his designation may be” shall be substituted with the words “whatever be the designation”.

ii. sub-regulation (6A) shall be numbered as clause (a) thereof and after clause (a) so numbered, the following clause shall be inserted, namely–

“(b) Chief Executive Officer (whatever be the designation) shall also ensure that the Asset Management Company has adequate systems in place to ensure that the Code of Conduct for Fund Managers and Dealers specified in PART – B of the Fifth Schedule of these regulations are adhered to in letter and spirit. Any breach of the said Code of Conduct shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Directors of the Asset Management Company and Trustees.”

iii. In sub-regulation (6B), the words “whatever the designation may be” shall be substituted with the words “whatever be the designation”.

iv. sub-regulation (6B) shall be numbered as clause (a) thereof and after clause (a) so numbered, the following clause shall be inserted, namely–

“(b) The Fund Managers (whatever be the designation) shall abide by the Code of Conduct for Fund Managers and Dealers specified in PART – B of the Fifth Schedule of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 and submit a quarterly self-certification to the Trustees that they have complied with the said code of conduct or list exceptions, if any.

Explanation:- For the purposes of this sub-regulation, the phrase “Fund Managers” shall include Chief Investment Officer (whatever be the designation).”

Click Here To Read Further

Tags:  SEBI

The post SEBI (Mutual Funds) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2020 appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/323wNeg

Aggregate Turnover cut-off of Rs 100 Crores for E-Invoicing soon

Aggregate Turnover cut-off of Rs 100 Crores for E-Invoicing soon

As in the first month of the introduction of E-Invoicing, more than 495 Lakh e-invoices were generated on the NIC portal by 27,400 taxpayers.

The Government is planning to reduce the aggregate turnover cut off to Rs. 100 Crores for IRN generation in the coming days. NIC has already enabled the API and offline tool based trial sites for these taxpayers.

For small taxpayers who need to prepare 5-10 B2B invoices in a day, NIC is also developing an offline Excel-based IRN preparation and IRN printing tool. This tool will allow:

• entering of invoice details,
• prepare no the file to upload on the portal,
• download the IRN with QR code and
• print the e-invoice with QR code.

Ref: Press Release dated 2nd November 2020.

Press Release

The post Aggregate Turnover cut-off of Rs 100 Crores for E-Invoicing soon appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3oMOclf

AO cannot made additions by ignoring method of accounting

AO cannot made additions by ignoring method of accounting

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

The Relevant Text of the Order as follows :

6. We have heard the submissions of learned counsel the assessee, who submitted that the assessee followed project completion method of accounting for its income from the project Jalaram Park. In this regard. our attention was drawn to the fact that project ,Jalaram Park commenced in April, 2003 and was completed on 29.3.2008. Our attention was drawn to the fact that in A.Y. 2008-09 the Assessee completed the aforesaid project and in the said assessment year, the assessee has declared income from the said project and has also claimed deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. Our attention was also drawn to computation of income and certificate in Form No. 1OCCB c1aiming deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act; and the completion certificate in respect of the project Jalaram Park. Our attention was drawn to the fact that right from the commencement of the project till completion of the project, the assessee has been filing its return of income clearly mentioning that it is following project completion method ,or accounting for income from the project Jalaram Park. Our attention was also drawn to the fact that in the books of account, cash receipts have been accounted as advance received against sale of flats/shops. These entries were passed in F.Y. 200S-06 relevant to A.Y. 2006-07, Relevant documents in this regard have been placed by the assessee in its paper book. Learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that even in assessment made after search arid seizure, the Assessing Officer has to compute income on the basis of method accounting followed by the assessee. In this regard, reliance was placed by learned counsel for the assessee on the decision of Pune Bench of the lTAT in the case of Dhanvarsha Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 289 ITR 50 (Pune)(AT). Further reliance was placed on the decision of Bangalore ITAT in the case of S.G.R. Enterprises Vs. ACIT, 112 TTJ (Bang) 377; wherein it has boen held that computation of undisclosed income on the basis of documents found in course of search and seizurehave to be compute in accordance with the completed contract of aeccunting followed by the assessee. Further reliance was placed on the decision of Bangalore ITAT in the ease of T.S. Chandrashekar Vs. ACIT, 66 TTJ 360 ; wherein it has been held that where the assessee is following completed contract method of accounting and where the project is not complete, a part of the project cannot be sliced off and its income be inc1uded in the block assessment as undisclosed income, Learned Departmental Representative, however relied on the orders of tho revenue authorities.

7. We have considered the rival submissions. It is not in dispute that receipts in question have direct nexus with the business of the assessee and represent cash receipts against sale of shops and flats. It is also not in dispute that the assessee follows project completion method of revenue recognition and that project was complete only in A.Y. 2008-09. Since, cash receipts have a direct nexus with the project of Jalaram Park, they have to be taxed only as income from the said project. The assessee has already recognized these receipts in its books of account while passing the necessary entries on 5.5.2005 in its books or accounts. In such circumstances we are of the view that receipts in question cannot be brought to tax in A.Y. 2003-04· to 2005-06. These receipts have already been accounted for in the books of account can be taxed only in the year in which project is complete and income from the project is offered for tax. Decision of Bangalore Bench of ITAT in the case of T.S. Chandrashekar (supra) supports the plea of the assessee in this regard. In other words, method of accounting cannot be ignored by the Assessing Officer and the amounts in question cannot be brought to tax in A.Ys 2003-04 to 2005-06. We therefore direct that the additions made in this regard be deleted.

8. The assessee has also raised other alternative grounds of appeal with regard to considering expenses while brining the cash receipts to tax and also claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(lO) of the Act. In view of the decision that cash receipts cannot be brought to tax in A.Ys. 2003-04 to 2005-06, those grounds do not require any adjudication at this stage.

9. In the result, appeals by the assessee are partly allowed.

Order has been pronounced on 28th Day of April, 2009.

Read Order

Tags:  Judgement, Appellant Tribunal

The post AO cannot made additions by ignoring method of accounting appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3entYd1

GST gross revenue of Rs. 1,05,155 crore collected in October 2020

GST gross revenue of Rs. 1,05,155 crore collected in October 2020

Ministry of Finance

PRESS RELEASE

01th NOV 2020

The gross GST revenue collected in the month of October, 2020 is ₹ 1,05,155crore of which CGST is ₹ 19,193 crore, SGST is ₹ 25,411 crore, IGST is ₹ 52,540 crore (including ₹ 23375crore collected on import of goods) and Cess is ₹ 8,011crore (including ₹932 crore collected on import of goods). The total number of GSTR-3B Returns filed for the month of October upto 31stOctober, 2020 is 80 lakh.

The government has settled ₹ 25,091 crore to CGST and ₹ 19,427 crore to SGST from IGST as regular settlement. The total revenue earned by Central Government and the State Governments after regular settlement in the month of October, 2020 is ₹ 44,285 crore for CGST and ₹ 44,839 crore for the SGST.

The revenues for the month are 10% higher than the GST revenues in the same month last year. During the month, revenues from import of goods was9% higher and the revenues from domestic transaction (including import of services) are11% higher that the revenues from these sources during the same month last year. The growth in GST revenue as compared to that in months of July, August and September, 2020 of -14%, -8% and 5% respectively clearly shows the trajectory of recovery of the economy and, correspondingly, of the revenues.

The chart shows trends in monthly gross GST revenues during the current year. The table shows the state-wise figures of GST collected in each State during the month of October, 2020 as compared to October, 2019 and for the full year.

Click Here To Read Further

Tags: GST

The post GST gross revenue of Rs. 1,05,155 crore collected in October 2020 appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3oSm8wP

IP cannot charge fees as percentage of amount distributed or realised

IP cannot charge fees as percentage of amount distributed or realised

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA

No. IBBI/DC/35(INTERIM)/2020                                                             29th October, 2020

Interim Order

In the matter of Mr. Anil Goel, Insolvency Professional (IP) under sub-regulation (4) of regulation 5 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Inspection and Investigation) Regulations, 2017

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has referred to the Disciplinary Committee (DC) the Interim Inspection Report (IIR) under sub-regulation (3) of regulation 5 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Inspection and Investigation) Regulations, 2017 (I&I Regulations) for gross violation of the provisions of the Code, Regulations made thereunder and directions of the Hon‟ble National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (Adjudicating Authority) by the IP, Mr. Anil Goel.

2. The IBBI, in exercise of its powers under section 218 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) read with the I&I Regulations has appointed the Inspecting Authority (IA), vide its order dated 13th October, 2020, to conduct inspection of Mr. Anil Goel with Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00118/2017-2018/10253 in the matter of liquidation of Varrsana Ispat Ltd., the Corporate Debtor (CD), on having reasonable grounds to believe that Mr. Goel had contravened the provisions of the Code and regulations thereunder and also the directions of Adjudicating Authority (AA) in the said matter. The IA has submitted an IIR to the IBBI under sub- regulation (2) of regulation 5 of the I&I Regulations.

3. On basis of materials available on record including the IIR, the DC notes as follows:

(i) Mr. Goel was appointed as an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) for Varrsana Ispat Limited, the CD vide order dated 16th November 2017 of the AA.

(ii) Mr. Goel was appointed as a Resolution Professional (RP) by a unanimous decision of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in the meeting held on 17th December 2017 and was later confirmed by the Hon‟ble NCLT vide its Order dated 02nd April 2018.

(iii) The Corporate insolvency resolution process failed as there being no prospective resolution applicant for resolution of insolvency despite CD being a going concern, due to the attachment of its assets by the Enforcement Directorate under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The AA vide its vide Order dated 6th August 2019 declared the commencement of liquidation of the Corporate Director and appointed Mr. Goel as the Liquidator.

(iv) On the basis of material available on record, the IBBI having reasonable grounds to believe that there is a gross violations of the provisions of the Code by Mr. Goel in the matter of Varrsana Ispat Limited appointed the IA to conduct an inspection of IP, Mr. Anil Goel. The IA, in pursuance of regulation 4 (1) of I&I Regulations, served a notice on Mr. Goel vide email dated 14th October, 2020 and directed to provide copies of duly enlisted documents by 25th October 2020 which have not been received yet by the IBBI.

IP cannot charge fees as percentage of amount distributed or realised

4. The DC notes from the IIR that the IA has observed contraventions of certain provisions of the Code, Regulations and directions of the Orders of Hon‟ble NCLT which are summarized as follows: –

Illegal distribution of funds by IP despite direction of the AA.

4.1 Mr. Goel illegally distributed funds despite the following directions of the AA given to the Liquidator, vide order dated 20th November, 2019 in C.A(IB) No. 1546/KB/2019 in CP(IB) No. 543/KB/2017:

“C.A(IB) No. 1546/KB/2019 is an application filed by the representative of the workmen alleging infringement of their rights as the stakeholders in taking decision by the liquidator regarding distribution of assets of the Corporate Debtor among the Financial Creditors pending consideration of the application filed u/s. 230 of the Companies Act, 2013. As the Company is a going concern the liquidator cannot distribute the assets till the determination of the interim application pending for compromise…”

4.1.1 Subsequently, an application was filed by Employees of the CD, against the Liquidator for blocking the sum of Rs.18 Crores for distribution amongst the stakeholders of the CD during liquidation process. This amount was to be utilized for the operations of the CD and disbursing of the same would adversely impact the operations of the CD. The Adjudicating Authority (AA) in the said matter has, vide an order dated 14th January, 2020, categorically observed as follows:

“….we are of the view that there is no justification for the Liquidator to withhold the aforesaid amount of Rs.18.00 crores and odd, lying with the Liquidator and it is directed that the same may be utilized for the operations of the Corporate Debtor to remain Corporate Debtor as going concern for distribution amongst stakeholders in equal manner as per provision of section 53 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which would include the claims of the employees, if any.”

4.1.2 The Liquidator, Mr. Goel, however, disregarded the AA‟s Orders prohibiting distribution of the assets of CD amongst the stakeholders and distributed a sum of Rs. 26 Crores, which could have been used as the working capital of the company to continue it as a profitable going concern. In two phases, the Liquidator distributed the amount of Rs.21 Crores on 04.02.2020 and Rs.5 Crores on 16.06.2020 amongst the Financial Creditors.

Click Here To Read Further

Tags:  Company Laws

The post IP cannot charge fees as percentage of amount distributed or realised appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3entSSH

Income from Sale of Land held as Stock is Business Income

Income from Sale of Land held as Stock is Business Income

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

The Relevant Text of the Order :

19. We have also perused the case laws submitted by the assessee. The case CIT Vs Tejas Securities 393 ITR 132 (Guj.), Deepa Ben Shah Vs DCIT 397 ITR 687, CIT Vs dealt with Short Term Capital Gains Vs business income in case of share transaction by a broker. Neither the facts nor the ratio is applicable to the instant case as that case deals with various parameters laid down by the CBDT as to how the holding period of the shares be considered. The case of CIT Vs Amit Modi 334 ITR 192 (P&H) also deals with the treatment of surplus arising on the sale of shares by an assessee taking into consideration of multiple factors for inferring whether a particular transactions is an adventure in the nature of trade or not. Similarly, the case of CIT Vs SMAA Enterprises 382 ITR 175 deals with treatment of shares made out of own funds. Similarly, the case of Telestar Investment 387 ITR 248 and Jubi lant Securities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 445 have been perused and found that the facts are pertaining to share transaction and investment and the ratio is not applicable to the instant case.

20. In the case of CIT Vs Gopal Purohit 336 ITR 287, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay upheld the Tribunal findings that there ought to be uniformity in treatment and consistency when the facts and circumstances are identical. It decided against the action of the revenue to treat the income differently in one particular year against regular method followed by the assessee and the revenue. Similarly, the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Mahendra Mi l ls 243 ITR 56 held that the department cannot take the advantage of mistake done by the assessee. This judgment has been delivered in connection with non-claiming of depreciation by the assessee in the return which has been claimed as a later date. The other case laws filed by the ld. AR have been duly perused and find that they are not applicable to the facts of the case. Most of the case laws rel ied upon by the ld. AR pertains to treatment of unsold stock-in-trade as investment by the stock brokers at the completion of the financial year. The conversion of stock-intrade to investments is a continuous process resorted to by these stock brokers which the revenue disputed to be treated as investments. Similarly, we have also gone through the judgment wherein the revenue cannot take the benefit of the mistake committed by the assessee in offering the income to tax. We have also gone through the judgments stating that books of accounts is not the final authority to determine the nature of the transactions. In this background, we have gone through the nature of the transactions independently so as to determine whether the land in question is investment or stock-in-trade irrespective of the fact whether the books of accounts have been wrongly accounted or whether the capital gains have been wrongly offered to tax.

21. The assessee has also taken a plea that the land has been sold only on account of the notice received from the revenue department to surrender the land as it was an encroachment on the Gaon Sabha Land. The notice was issued in the year 1997 hence cannot be given any relevance with regard to determination for the issue before us. The fact that the land in question has been sold after obtaining NOC from the ADM, South District, New Delhi on 24.01.2011. We find that the main objects of the company are to acquire purchase take on lease are otherwise any land building, structures plot to act as real estate agents in connection with building schemes and also to be colonizers to sale plots and flats. Having acquired the land as stock-in-trade, the land continued to be held for business purpose and continued to be shown as closing stock for all the years. The assessee is into the business of acquiring and sale of plot and colonizers. Hence, on going through the Memorandum and Articles of Association, conduct and business affairs of the assessee, and on perusal of the books of accounts of the assessee, it cannot to be said to be an income arising out of capital gains and has been rightly treated as business income by the ld. CIT (A).

Adjudication as to whether the capital gains are el igible to avail its exemption:

22. Since, we have already ruled that the income derived by the assessee is “business income” but not “capital gains”, any adjudication as to whether the capital gains are eligible for exemption or not would be only academic in nature. As a ground to this extent has been taken by the assessee, the same is being adjudicated as under:

23. Section 2(14)(iii) deals with agricultural land in India with regard to the meaning of capital asset. The Section reads as under:

“Section 2(14)……..

(iii) agricultural land in India, not being land situate—

(a) in any area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality (whether known as a municipality, municipal corporation, notified area committee, town area committee, town committee, or by any other name) or a cantonment board and which has a population of not less than ten thousand [***] ; or

[(b) in any area within the distance, measured aerially,—

(I) not being more than two kilometers, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in item (a) and which has a population of more than ten thousand but not exceeding one lakh;

or

(II) not being more than six kilometers, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in item (a) and which has a population of more than one lakh but not exceeding ten lakh; or

(III) not being more than eight kilometers, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in item (a) and which has a population of more than ten lakh.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-clause, “population” means the population according to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been publ ished before the first day of the previous year;]]”

24. The fundamental principles with regard to the Section 2(14)(iii) can be summed up in the case of assessee as under:

a. “No land within the municipal limit of Delhi can be considered as agricultural land.

b. The issue of population arises if the land is situated outside the limits of the municipality. In that case the twin conditions of distance and the population have to be made to claim it as a noncapital asset.”

25. The assessee’s contention that South Delhi Municipal Corporation has came into existence in the year 2011 doesn’t materially support anything with regard to the municipal limit as even after bifurcation, the municipal limit remained unaltered. Hence, even based on the municipal limits of Delhi Municipal Corporation or even based on municipal limits of South Delhi Municipal Corporation, the assessee’s land which is in the Bhatti, Hauz Khas, New Delhi falls within the jurisdiction of the municipality at the time of purchase and at the time of sale as well as at the time of sale cannot escape the rigors of taxation.

26. Since, the income earned has been already adjudicated on merits to be taxed as “business income”, it is hereby clarified that the treatment proposed by the assessee to consider the proceeds of the sale of land under the head “Long Term Capital Gains” and subsequent exemption from taxation cannot be held to be valid in the eyes of law.

27. Regarding the disallowance of Rs.2,00,000/- u/s 40(a)(ia), the assessee claimed to have paid brokerage to a person namely, Sh. Sunder Singh. The assessee submitted that since this is the first year of business transaction in the absence of TAN, no TDS could be deducted. The ld. CIT (A) upheld the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) on the grounds that the assessee is not a new company and been in the business of land transactions from 1997 and the provisions of TDS are clearly defaulted by the assessee. In the absence of any evidences contra, putforth by the assessee, we hereby decline to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT (A) on this issue.

28. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 05/05/2020.

Read Order

Tags:  Judgement, Appellant Tribunal

The post Income from Sale of Land held as Stock is Business Income appeared first on Studycafe.

from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3jQgjfN